55 The value (and surplus value) of the sense of responsibility in economics Luciano Canova «We should try to be happy, just to set an example». The verses of Jacques Prévert, with their easygoing lyricism, highlight a rather clear outcome from social research: the context in which we make decisions is a fundamental element in shaping them. For this reason, a good policy maker must design (specifically, we talk about behavioural design) interventions and regulations that enable the relationship between the economy and society to develop in synergy. Consumers with their choices, businesses as the neuralgic node of the system: in a context of social responsibility, the economy thrives. It is true, however, that we must be careful not to let words become trends, and in times of great turbulence like the actual we are living in, it is precisely up to economists to define what it means to be a responsible consumer or business. And to propose adequate indicators for a metric of happiness. In economics, optimism and responsibility introduce a different perspective: economic success is not merely about the accumulation of wealth, but is reflected in a community's ability to ensure prosperity and widespread well-being, based on parameters that go beyond mere economic output. GDP is an essential but limited indicator, and even national accounting has absorbed this evolution. While it quantifies production and consumption, it overlooks critical factors such as environmental impact, wealth distribution, and employment stability. Martha Nussbaum’s capabilities approach suggests a broader focus, emphasising aspects such as access to education, public health, and social inclusion as indicators of genuine progress. A responsible economic system is not limited to generating income, but invests in the conditions that enable individuals to lead dignified and meaningful lives. Therefore, the role of responsibility as a driving force behind economic development becomes crucial. This perspective shifts the focus from the short to the long term, favouring strategies that aim for sustainable well-being rather than immediate returns. However, this raises a fundamental question: is it possible to measure responsibility in economics? To answer this, we must consider alternative metrics that take into account environmental sustainability, social justice, and the redistribution of opportunities. In this context, Italy’s Istat has developed the Index of equitable and sustainable well-being (BES), which integrates parameters relating to quality of life, health, and ecological impact, offering a more nuanced picture of a country's economic conditions. Approaches 54 like the Human Development Index (HDI), the United Nations’ World Happiness Report, and ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) criteria also provide broader measures of progress on a global scale. However, the introduction of these metrics is not always welcomed. Andrew Winston, in the Harvard Business Review, has highlighted, in Why Business Leaders Must Resist the Anti-ESG Movement, how a hostile rhetoric towards sustainable investments has developed in recent years. Some critics indeed consider them a distraction from profits or a volatile trend. Yet, data shows that companies with strong ESG policies also have greater economic resilience and a superior ability to adapt to global crises. Furthermore, economic responsibility is not limited to the adoption of sustainable policies; it also concerns the ability to foresee and mitigate the long-term effects of business decisions. The most forward-thinking companies not only protect their reputation but also generate added value for all their stakeholders, promoting more equitable and sustainable growth. But does being a responsible company come at a cost? To some extent, yes. Companies that adopt sustainable business models often face higher initial investments. For example, reducing CO2 emissions, improving working conditions, and ensuring transparent governance can reduce profit margins in the short term. However, in the long run, responsibility translates into a competitive advantage. Sustainable businesses reduce the risk of reputational damage, attract valuable talent, and build customer loyalty. Moreover, adopting responsible business models can create new market opportunities and strengthen global competitiveness. At the organisational level, the role of the CEO is also evolving. While executives still hold immense power and earn extraordinary salaries (the median is $13 million per year), their job has become more complex. Historically, control over physical capital was the primary tool of management, but today more than 60% of the value of S&P 500 companies is linked to intangible assets such as R&D, data, and brands, making the relationship between investment and results less predictable. Moreover, company boundaries are more blurred: millions of workers are external but crucial to the business, and digitalisation has reduced the CEO’s direct authority.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDUzNDc=